D&D 5E Surf's D&D 5e Monster Analysis

[pemerton]

I think it's fair to call hit dice the glue that binds hit points and Constitution.

<snip>

suppose one is designing a creature and has both a sense of how tough it should be in the abstract game-driven sense (hp) and how tough it should be in a more fiction-driven sense (Constitution). Hit dice adds a degree of freedom which allows one to hit both targets in the same mechanical framework.

You could just assign the hit points that fit, and the CON that fits, and cut out the mediating term!

Because of that, I think the other reasons you give for including hit dice are more compelling.

 

[Ainamacar]

You could just assign the hit points that fit, and the CON that fits, and cut out the mediating term!

Because of that, I think the other reasons you give for including hit dice are more compelling.

As long as you're comfortable with Con having absolutely no defined mechanical relationship to hit points you certainly could do that. However, I suspect even people who design toward a hp target will tend to prefer that Con has some sort of identifiable mechanical impact on hp. If so there is a need for a framework (i.e. a rule or at least a design guideline), whether that is hit dice or something else.

I think it's pretty easy to test your intuition on this. Suppose someone hands you any monster. Then they change that monster's Con score by an arbitrary amount. (For the sake of argument assume this change leaves a valid creature, e.g. in 5e the new Con is still between 1 and 30. In addition, also assume this is a "first class" change, impacting it exactly as though the creature had had this new Con score from the start.) Now then, are the monster's hit points affected by this change? If you're comfortable saying "no" for any degree of change then you clearly don't need a mediating rule/guideline. If you're not comfortable saying "no" for any degree of change you probably do, even if you design with hp targets in mind.

 

[pemerton]

As long as you're comfortable with Con having absolutely no defined mechanical relationship to hit points you certainly could do that. However, I suspect even people who design toward a hp target will tend to prefer that Con has some sort of identifiable mechanical impact on hp.

In 4e CON factors in as a flat add to hit points. At low levels that actually matters, because it might be as much as half a monster's hit points. But once you have monster levels in the double-digits, the impact of CON tends to get swamped on anything but a solo (where it is being multiplied by 4).

If a 15th level brute has a 16 CON, its hit points are 176. If its CON is 20, its hit points are 180. Those 4 hp are going to be irrelevant nearly every the time the creature is used in play, and personally I would be quite happy if they played no role in 4e monster building, and if the hp/level formula was simply tweaked to account for typical CON scores across role and level.

 

[Ainamacar]

In 4e CON factors in as a flat add to hit points. At low levels that actually matters, because it might be as much as half a monster's hit points. But once you have monster levels in the double-digits, the impact of CON tends to get swamped on anything but a solo (where it is being multiplied by 4).

If a 15th level brute has a 16 CON, its hit points are 176. If its CON is 20, its hit points are 180. Those 4 hp are going to be irrelevant nearly every the time the creature is used in play, and personally I would be quite happy if they played no role in 4e monster building, and if the hp/level formula was simply tweaked to account for typical CON scores across role and level.

Yes, I considered using that as an example. In a strange way that aspect of 4e pleases neither of us, at least with respect to monster design. You see the impact of Con vanish asymptotically and think it would be better if they'd eliminated it in the first place. I see the impact of Con vanish asymptotically and think it would have been better if they'd kept it meaningful.

I'll admit the original premise of targeting hp is, by itself, insufficient to either recommend or exclude a mediating framework. I think we understand each other, though. Always a pleasure.

 

[pemerton]

Always a pleasure.

Of course!

I'll pollute the thread with one more off-topic post: I think 4e would have been better if stats had been removed altogether form determining PC attack bonuses (make them purely level-based as for monsters) and probably for hit points as well (for the reasons we just discussed). That would leave stats as a source of damage bonuses, healing surges, power effects and (perhaps most importantly) skill bonuses.

 

[Quickleaf]

Oh I think it's ok. That's not where I see problems with this edition's monsters...

I'm curious where you see the problems with 5e's monsters, either from a theory standpoint or from play experience?

 

[Grazzt]

I am not the surfing one, but I suspect that, rather than "target HD", 5e monster design has "target hps" and doesn't really care how you get there. If the target is about 50 hp, you could have a big, burly giant (huge size for d12s, CON 16 for +3 per die) and only need 5 or 6 hit dice; or you could have a feeble monkey-like creature (small size for d6x, CON 8 for -1 per die) and need 20 HD. Since proficiency is based on CR rather than HD, the game doesn't care. (Shades of 4e monster design, basing hp on level!)

Yep. This. I've dumped all the monsters from the DM Basic stuff as well as all the preview releases thus far into a spreadsheet and that's what I'm seeing more or less. HP and CR have a correlation, while HD seem to be used only to get the monster to the "appropriate" hp range.

 

[Quickleaf]

Yep. This. I've dumped all the monsters from the DM Basic stuff as well as all the preview releases thus far into a spreadsheet and that's what I'm seeing more or less. HP and CR have a correlation, while HD seem to be used only to get the monster to the "appropriate" hp range.

I continue to be impressed by the dedication of you guys crunching numbers to "evidence-based" game design.

I'm curious why they included a chart for monster Hit Dice by size then? Is it merely in case the monsters interact with the player healing rules for a short/long rest? There's got to be more to it than that..

 

[surfarcher]

Yep. This. I've dumped all the monsters from the DM Basic stuff as well as all the preview releases thus far into a spreadsheet and that's what I'm seeing more or less. HP and CR have a correlation, while HD seem to be used only to get the monster to the "appropriate" hp range.

My own spreadsheet has 209 monsters and something like 45 columns... And another 5 sheets with 1000s of rows of number crunching... lmao!

 

[the Jester]

So when are you going to post your next monster design blog post, [MENTION=84774]surfarcher[/MENTION]?

Now that we have a table of contents for the MM, I'm eager to start a 5e Monster Project.